Allowed

Prakash v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 May 2023CRLAS/88/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Special Criminal Appeal No. 88/2023, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jodhpur allowed the appeal filed under Section 14A of the SC/ST (PA) Act against the rejection of a bail application. The Court set aside the order of the Special Judge and granted bail to the appellant subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 10.1.2023 rejecting bail was set aside. The appellant was ordered to be enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.

Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/013843]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 88/2023

¶4

Prakash S/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 25 Years, Patan, P.s. Badnor, Dist. Bhilwara. (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Bhilwara).

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Pooja Devi D/o Mangu Ram Bhil, Barariyon Ka Badiya, Mogar, Badnor, Dist. Bhilwara.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Appellant(s)	: Mr.Bhushan Singh Charan.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.Shiv Kumar Bhati,P.P.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR JUDGMENT

¶12

05/05/2023

¶13

The instant appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST (PA) Act has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 10.1.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (PA) Act Cases, Bhilwara in Cr.Misc. Bail Application No.13/2023, whereby the bail application filed by the appellant, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.190/2022 registered at Police Station Badnor, District Bhilwara, for offences under Sections 366, 376(2) (n) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (PA) Act, has been rejected.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the court towards statements of prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., learned counsel for the

[2023/RJJD/013843]

[CRLAS-88/2023]

(2 of 3)

petitioner submitted that the prosecutrix is a major married woman, who is living separately from her husband. Learned counsel submitted that from the perusal of the FIR and statements of prosecutrix, it is evident that allegation upon petitioner is of indulging in physical relationship with prosecutrix by making false promise of marriage. Learned counsel vehemently submitted that as a matter of fact when the petitioner could not keep his promise of marrying the prosecutrix, the relations between them turned sour and FIR was lodged against the petitioner on 03.12.2022, without disclosing the date and place of incident. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that failure to keep a promise of marriage would not amount to rape as it is merely a case of consensual physical relations between the two grownup persons. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in judicial custody, challan has been filed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellant.

¶19

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

¶21

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶22

Accordingly, the appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST (PA) Act is allowed. The order dated 10.1.2023 passed by learned

¶23

(3 of 3) [CRLAS-88/2023]

¶24

[2023/RJJD/013843]

¶25

Special Judge, SC/ST (PA) Act Cases, Bhilwara is set aside and it is ordered that the accused-appellant- Prakash S/o Bhanwar Lal shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.190/2022 registered at Police Station Badnor, District Bhilwara, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to so.

¶26

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶27

/tarun goyal/ Sr.No.213

Prakash v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arjun Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Deda Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Gumana Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Niranjan Vs State of Rajasthan

Deva Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rameshwar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan